The Board of Game is considering an additional brown bear season on the Alaska Peninsula — despite a declining bear population.
Why? As a favor to hunting guides.
Alaska Peninsula Bear Hunting trip priced at $29,500 | Worldwide Trophy Adventures
Keep reading to learn how to submit your comment in support of biologically-informed wildlife management by May 27th.
Background
The iconic bears of the Alaska Peninsula are in distress. This bear population has been declining for the last twenty years, and almost 2,050 of these bears have been killed by hunters since 2011.
Unit 9 is home to some of Alaska’s largest and most famous bears. These are the bears of the Katmai Fat Bear competition, the Brooks Falls webcam, and McNeil River.
Now, as a favor to a small group of guides and the trophy hunters they cater to, the Alaska Board of Game is considering the extraordinary step of allowing three consecutive hunts (Spring 2021, Fall 2021, Spring 2022) on these vulnerable bears — something we haven’t seen since the 1970s.
This is a recipe for disaster. Here’s how it happened.
Bear 435, aka "Holly," before and after her prehibernation weigh-in. Holly went on to win the final round in Fat Bear Week 2019. Katmai National Park & Preserve
During a teleconference on April 14, 2020, the Alaska Board of Game heard testimony from hunters (including out-of-state hunters) and guides who lobbied for increased hunting opportunities of bears in 2021 as a means to compensate for pandemic-related lost revenue in spring 2020.
During that meeting, the Board of Game generated the following proposal:
PROPOSAL 1 - 5 AAC 85.020. Seasons and bag limits for brown bear. If adopted, proposal 1 would open a special spring 2021 season for certain registration brown bear hunts in the Alaska Peninsula, which is designated as Game Management Unit 9. Currently, a portion of the spring bear hunting in GMU 9 occurs on an alternating schedule: open for spring hunting in 2020 and closed in 2021. This special season would be for one year only.
The Alaska Board of Game will be holding a special meeting at 1pm on June 3rd to vote on this proposal.
Alaska Wildlife Alliance is not anti-hunting. In fact, we have hundreds of hunters in our membership and several on our Board. We believe in ecosystem-based management, grounded in sound science.
We are very concerned about PROPOSAL 1 - 5 AAC 85.020. Seasons and bag limits for brown bear, which would add an extra hunting season next spring (2021) on the Alaska Peninsula, resulting in three unprecedented, consecutive hunting seasons of brown bears.
Brown bear sow with cubs, Alaska Department of Fish & Game
How you can help protect these brown bears from being over-hunted
You can be a voice for wildlife by letting the Board of Game know that you do not support them jeopardizing the future sustainability and population health of brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula for the sole purpose of increasing economic opportunities for a select user group. Submit your written comments until 5pm on Wednesday May 27, 2020.
Use facts from our fact sheet below to submit your comment in under 20 minutes!
We oppose Proposal 1, which adds a Spring 2021 brown bear hunt in Unit 9, because:
Alternating seasons were implemented in for a reason - preventing overharvest.
Hunting of brown bears in GMU 9 occurs in the spring and fall, but in alternating years (spring hunting season in even years; fall hunting season in odd years). This alternating cycle of hunting seasons has been in effect in GMU 9 since 1976 because having two hunting seasons each year was resulting in overharvest and wasn’t sustainable for the bear population.
There have been no instances in almost 45 years in which multiple hunting seasons per year were authorized because the bear population has not been robust enough to support multiple seasons per year. There are no data to show that the situation has changed and that adding a spring 2021 season would not result in overharvest.
Just two years ago at the Board of Game meeting, during a discussion by the Board of whether or not to add a resident-only early season hunt in GMU 9, Alaska Department of Fish & Game’s (ADF&G) bear biologist for GMU 9 said the brown bear population could not sustain an additional level of harvest, even the comparatively low level of harvest by residents (which is only about 25% of the total annual harvest of brown bears in GMU 9).
It’s important to note that this is not a subsistence issue. Some subunits in Unit 9 allow for year-round resident near-village and subsistence hunts, the only hunts that allow a bear to be taken any time of the year. The status of these subsistence hunts are not impacted by this proposal.
The true status of brown bears is unknown and decisions are based on inadequate data.
Surprisingly, ADF&G does not routinely monitor the population of brown bears in GMU 9. They haven’t conducted transect surveys to count bears in GMU 9 since the mid 2000s and have no plans to conduct any abundance surveys in the foreseeable future.
This means that the management decisions about how many bears can be harvested are not based on scientific studies of the wild population, but rather are based on the numbers of hunters who report killing a bear.
Since ADF&G has no plans to survey the population, they won’t be able to know until it’s too late if too many bears were killed as a result of three consecutive hunting seasons in a row for the population to maintain long-term viability.
ADF&G’s bear biologist for GMU 9 has recently expressed concerns to the Board of Game that the population of brown bears in GMU 9 has been declining since the 2000s, and from 2013-2017, he received numerous reports from area scientists, long-term guides, and the public asking “Where’s the bears?” because they weren’t seeing them like they used to.
In 2018 ADF&G reported that an entire cohort (age class) of young bears was lost due to a longer spring hunt in 2013 and severe weather events in winter 2011/2012 and 2012/2013. This loss is in addition to the long-term decline in bear numbers.
The total number of bears harvested in the last decade was notably less than previous decades, which is a sign of concern for the population.
During the 2018 Board of Game meeting this was theorized to be the result of the inability of hunters to find bears because there were fewer bears to find (and not a reduction in the desire to hunt brown bears).
ADF&G continues to claim there are “up to 8,000 bears” in GMU 9 based on extrapolations from data collected between 1999 and 2005, despite some of their other reports suggesting the estimate is too high.
The latest population data 15-20 years old, it can no longer be deemed a reliable estimate of the number of brown bears in GMU 9, especially when ADF&G indicates the population has been declining since the 2000s.
Management decisions that result in removing animals from a population should not be based on the maximum estimate of animals in the population, but rather should be based on the minimum number of animals in the population. That way you don’t remove too many animals from the population, and don’t risk jeopardizing the sustainability of the population.
The age and size of hunted bears increased in the past decade as compared to previous decades, meaning more older “trophy-sized” bears of both sexes are being killed in recent years, and fewer younger animals are being killed.
Recognizing the concern with “mining” out the big bears, during the 2018 Board of Game meeting, the Board members voted to reduce the spring brown bear hunt by one week. There has not been sufficient time, or population monitoring, to know if these strategies were successful.
ADF&G’s management guidelines for GMU 9 bears is to “maintain a high bear density”, but it is unclear how they measure a bear density, let alone ensure high bear density, when they are not conducting population surveys. AWA asked ADF&G this question, but has not yet received a reply.
The Board of Game is Playing Politics over Biology
The Board is only considering an additional hunting season to provide an economic stimulus to hunters and hunting guides in GMU 9 as a result of income lost due to Covid-19.
Covid-19 business aid is administered through the state and federal government, and should not be an issue taken up by the Board of Game. The Board was established to make regulatory decisions based on sound science for the sustainability of wildlife for all user groups.
The Board of Game is mandated to manage wildlife for all Alaskans and favoring one of the other is in violation of the board’s purpose.
Specifically, Board members are appointed on “the basis of interest in public affairs, good judgment, knowledge, and ability in the field of action of the board, and with a view to providing diversity of interest and points of view in the membership”. This proposal does not provide a “diversity of interest”, and instead focus solely on the interests of one user group, potentially at the detriment of other user groups.
If the population is impacted, which it likely will given the biological data reported by ADF&G, the impacts to all other users could be immense. The wildlife viewing, wildlife photography, and sport fishing industries (who often appeal to consumers for bear viewing opportunities while fishing) account for millions of dollars each year. Not only are these users suffering during a drop in tourism this year, but could suffer from overharvest by one group later down the line if the population falls. These bears are extremely famous, both in hunting and viewing arenas, and the plight of their populations will be monitored world wide.
Too much, too soon
If the Board considers the smaller 2020 season a “wash” that allows increased harvest in 2021, they should have closed the spring 2020 season. Instead, as of May 8, ADF&G had issued 36 permits to resident hunters for the spring 2020 season hunt, which is open through May 31 in some places.
This proposal is only appropriate to consider after the end of the Spring 2020 season so we know how many bears were taken and can make a better determination. The Board’s rush to consider this proposal suggests that they are doing it to ensure guides have economic prospects and can roll over hunts. If the Board is rushing this because they want to do this through the existing chair (he retires in June), that is not a sufficient reason to haste biologically teetering information.
In summary
The Board of Game wants to add an extra hunting season in the spring of 2021, when there normally would not be a hunt, resulting in 3 back-to-back hunts, which hasn’t occurred since the 1970s because multiple seasons per year result in known overharvest. They want to do this for a population with an outdated abundance estimate, that is experiencing a long-term decline in numbers, which has lost an entire cohort, and for which a disproportionately large adults are taken in recent years. Because there is no monitoring of the brown bear population, there is no way to know what kind of effect adding an extra hunting season next spring will have on the population. Some have dismissed any effects of an additional hunt next spring because they say there was no hunt this spring, however, the season was not closed and at least 36 permits were issued. Since the season hasn’t officially closed yet, and permits were issued, it is premature to assume no bears were killed this spring.
Tell the Board of Game know that you do not support them jeopardizing the future sustainability and population health of brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula for the sole purpose of increasing economic opportunities for a select user group.
Written comments on proposals must include:
Your first and last name
Your community of residence
The proposal number. When identifying the proposal number, use the entire phrase:
“PROPOSAL 1 - 5 AAC 85.020. Seasons and bag limits for brown bear.”
Written comments may be submitted by any of the following means:
online via the Board of Game’s website at www.boardofgame.adfg.alaska.gov
emailed to dfg.bog.comments@alaska.gov
faxed to 907-465-6094.
The deadline for submitting written comments is Wednesday, May 27, 2020.
The meeting agenda, notice, proposals, and other meeting materials are be available online here. Audio recording of the April 14, 2020 meeting can be found online here.
What Is the Board of Game?
The Alaska Board of Game is the state's leading regulatory authority with regards to wildlife management— they are charged with making allocative and regulatory decisions that affect wildlife across the state.
The board has seven members, each appointed by the governor for a three-year term. Each member must be confirmed by a joint session of the state legislature.
Contrary to popular belief, the seven members who make these regulatory decisions are not Alaska Department of Fish & Game employees, rather they are members of the public appointed by the governor to be the official decision-makers.
The State of Alaska’s regulations include mandates to provide for multiple uses of our wildlife resources, including non-consumptive uses such as wildlife viewing.
Unfortunately, in recent years the Board of Game’s representation has become less diversified and less representative of all wildlife users.
The focus has strongly shifted to representing the interests of consumptive users, such as sport hunters and trappers, while virtually eliminating a voice for non-consumptive users, such as wildlife viewers, despite the fact that wildlife viewing brings a greater socio-economic benefit to the state than hunting (in 2011, wildlife viewing activities supported over $2.7 billion dollars in economic activity in Alaska).
